Slashdot Mirror
Safe Harbor Cost the US Music Industry Up To $1B in Lost Royalties Per Year, Study Finds (musicweek.com)
An anonymous reader shares a report: For the first time, researchers have quantified the "value gap" and its impact on the US recorded music industry. A study published yesterday (March 29) by Washington, DC-based economy think tank the Phoenix Centre For Advanced Legal And Economic Public Policy Studies attempted to calculate how much revenue the recording industry loses from the distortions caused by the safe harbor provisions. Entitled Safe Harbors And The Evolution of Music Retailing, the study was conducted by T. Randolph Beard, George S. Ford and Michael Stern who applied "accepted economic modelling techniques" to simulate revenue effects from royalty rate changes on YouTube. It showed that if YouTube were to pay the recorded music industry market rates, similar to what other streaming services pay, its economic contributions to the sector would be significantly bigger. The premises used by the Phoenix Centre economists was that, according to the music recording industry, YouTube evades paying market rates for the use of copyrighted content by exploiting the Digital Millennium Copyright Act's "safe harbor" provisions, which allow to post creative content online in good faith and remove it if rights holders so require. Using 2015 data, the Phoenix Centre found that "a plausible royalty rate increase could produce increased royalty revenues in the US of $650 million to over one billion dollars a year."
Half the music posted on YouTube is by the musicians for promotion.
So they are stealing from themselves?
The musicians are stealing from the record companies.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Someone watching a youtube video does not equate to a lost "sale" from a streaming service. The youtube viewer would have never paid to listen to your song.
The Official Site of 1337 Pwnage
If YouTube were to pay the recorded music industry market rates, similar to what other streaming services pay, its economic contributions to the sector would be 0. This would be so because YouTube would simply not allow copyright music on its service.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
Lack of Good Music Costs Them $2 Billion Per Year
I've bought numerous albums on bandcamp because I stumbled onto them on YouTube.
Now I understand that Bandcamp isn't likely included in the concerns of mainstream record companies. But I do believe that I am an active consumer that is spending money in this industry, and that I am not "stealing" billions of dollars.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Has anyone done any Math/economic modeling of how much the music industry is worth if everyone payed them "properly"? By my terrible estimates, it's worth more than the combined GDP of the entire world.
...I wonder how many billions of dollars excessive copyright terms have cost the U.S. citizenry directly. Half the Beatles are dead, for crying out loud, and it's been almost 50 years since their last album was released. There's no way copyright can encourage them to record another album.
Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
I have never heard of the Phoenix Center for Advanced Legal & Economic Policy Studies so I went to the their website. Unfortunately I can't find anything talking about their funding sources. However, they do have a prominent endorsement on their homepage from Ajit Pai, which is a substantial red flag.
Propublica sadly only has their funding lumped together as "contributions", which doesn't help.
I read the internet for the articles.
because my values changed, i guess paying utility bills, buying food, clothing, and car insurance is more important, and besides that i rather just listen to the radio because it also includes local news and weather, and i rather search youtube for amateurs that upload their music because they do it as a labor of love not because of any profit motive, to hell with the music industry, the music industry is dying because that is exactly what it is "A for-profit industry" and when it comes to spending money music is not high on the list of most people's priorities, you know, stuff like food, rent, clothes, insurance, etc...
Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
Article I, Section 8, Clause 8 of the United States Constitution, known as the Copyright Clause, empowers the United States Congress: To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries. Pop music and Hollywood movies aren't science and the useful arts. They are only frivolous entertainment. Also, "limited times" meant 14 years, renewable once for 28 in the original 1790 copyright law. Now, with extensions passed every 20 years to keep Steamboat Willie out of the public domain, it is virtually perpetual. This locking up ideas asp property is no less a form of censorship than trying to suppress them, and does not promote progress at all.
The Uncoveror: It's the real news.
Hah. Sure. Mp3.com owes me $103.00. What is the point in making sales when you don't get paid?
http://www.acetonestudio.com
Snickers candy bars are priced at $1, sold 20 million units last year.
If we'd priced them at $5 each, we'd have made $100 million, meaning we lost $80 million underpricing Snickers!
Anyone see the faulty logic there?
-Styopa
Mea culpa, you're correct that radio stations do pay licensing fees, however when converted to a per song play basis it seems to be remarkably less than what Internet companies are paying.